Until recently, I thought the state government was doing a very good job managing the COVID-19 problem. The trouble is that every solution is always the generator of the next set of problems, and it is those generated problems that have not been given much thought.

I have seldom seen a state or federal government use a problem solving model; I have seldom if ever seen a state or federal government solve anything by using overriding power, or exercising a right because they don't go a step further and look at the underlying needs and interests from which much better solutions can grow.

It is very clear social distancing is important, it is very clear that hygiene is also critical to surviving the pandemic. But we have a government that has decided on essential businesses. And that is a problem in itself, they focus on what they think is essential, rather than how can business continue while still accomplishing social distancing and hygiene, the two main underlying needs or interests. Why focus on essential when the focus should be on the many ways of minimizing the disease spreading?

For example, plant nurseries are not essential according to the state, yet big box stores can have nursery departments remain open. This allows big companies to obliterate mom-and-pop nurseries, and increases traffic in big stores who have to limit people making social distancing thus generate longer waiting lines. Rather than classify nurseries as not essential, why not require nurseries to ensure social distancing and hygiene, let them solve their specific business and hygiene needs.

Those doing the work are often the best at coming up with solutions, certainly better than a state government trying to make a one-size-fits-all answer. Santa Fe and Albuquerque are not the same as Silver City or Lordsburg. Let each local government address how social distancing and hygiene should be solved, and they in turn could delegate that to the local stores. Oversight, yes. Enforce the need for social distancing and hygiene, yes; forget about essential versus non-essential. A blanket answer ill-suited to the majority of businesses helps no one; small businesses have been and are the backbone of the country.

For example, barbers are not essential, so if we address social distancing and hygiene by letting them set appointments every half hour, or whatever works for them, is not the problem solved? Why close them down when there is a need, why not let them solve the mandatory social distancing requirement.

And why on earth close liquor stores? This is even more amazing than nurseries and barbers. We don't let them sell by drive through, yet a restaurant can do so. We don't even let them limit customers at a time, yet we do for big stores such as Albertsons; so customers wanting beer or wine increase big store traffic because they can sell liquor. Amazing lack of problem solving here!

Similarly, hair salons, and other businesses could remain open, albeit it with reduced business. Let the lowest level decide how to implement social distancing and hygiene, and simply enforce just those basic social distancing and hygiene requirements, not the blanket "you are not essential."

The underlying issue is not one of being fair, it is one of limiting spread using social distancing and hygiene. Yet a little bit of thought can solve both fairness as well as minimizing disease spreading.

This is called interest-based thinking rather than positional thinking. This is also called interest-based solving rather than righ- based solving or power-based problem solving.

And that is why I signed a petition recently to ask the governor to rethink blanket one-size-fits-all solutions, and focus on enforcing underlying needs.

Thank you

Simon Wheaton-Smith

Grant County resident